• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD VEGA confirmed for 2017 H1

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am beginning to think that Vega is a whole range of GPU's. Polaris prices will be reduced to budget GPUs with Vega becoming the new mainstream and higher parts.

Basically, I am hoping Vega will be a range of GPUs in the $200 price range and above, filling AMDs lineup from mainstream to high end.

And while I am thinking positive, I hope AMD have been waiting so long because they skipped this generation and that the VEGA cards are supposed to compete with Volta whenever it comes out.
 
personally i never saw any video of AMD saying they have 2 different chip sizes or a full line up, to me it 's only 1chip full CUs and another lasered CUs.
 
AlamoX said:
personally i never saw any video of AMD saying they have 2 different chip sizes or a full line up, to me it 's only 1chip full CUs and another lasered CUs.
Click to expand...
So what does Vega 10 and 11 mean to you? Unless people made that up, it is reasonable to conclude each will have at least 2 gpu's imo.
 
It's been far too long, AMD's best GPU is the FuryX and they don't even make those anymore. When Vega does come out it's likely to be around 1070 and 1080 performance, by going off history, and then Volta will come out and destroy it. AMD need to pull a master stroke by releasing an absolute monster of a GPU for a good price
 
I just had a look at the AMD GPU sales section here and it is pretty barren. No 390s, no Nanos, no Fury or Fury X. That is pretty crazy but there is 2x Duo for sale (not that I would advise anyone to go XFire) and your next best GPU is the 580. Still, 8 days til Computex, so hopefully Vega 10 will be a beast to kick some NVidia butt!
 
Gregster said:
I just had a look at the AMD GPU sales section here and it is pretty barren. No 390s, no Nanos, no Fury or Fury X. That is pretty crazy but there is 2x Duo for sale (not that I would advise anyone to go XFire) and your next best GPU is the 580. Still, 8 days til Computex, so hopefully Vega 10 will be a beast to kick some NVidia butt!
Click to expand...
you mean a month and 8 days till Computex ^_^
 
TNA said:
My guess has always been 4 GPU's, 2 for small and 2 for big Vega. But could be more, with some using GDDR5 instead of HBM2.
Click to expand...

I don't think there'll be an GDDR5 cards just 4gb & 8gb models.

Maybe even a 12gb models if it's got the oomph,
If it's just 4 & 8 gb cards I'm sure Nvidia will be involved with a big game release not long after the Vega cards appear and we'll find that the ultra texture setting
needs more than 8 gb's of memory so that it makes the Vega cards look inferior to the Ti etc.
I've got the following games installed that I haven't played yet because I want better performance than I can get from a single Fury pro at UW1440.
Stuff like Project cars, Gears of War 4, Witcher 3, The Phantom Pain, Dishonored 2 & Mankind Divided. They're all waiting on Vega...
Plus I still need to get RE7, Quantum Break, Sniper Elite 4 and a couple of others so hopefully that's lots of great gaming for Vega to impress me with :D
 
DONOHUE07 said:
It's been far too long, AMD's best GPU is the FuryX and they don't even make those anymore. When Vega does come out it's likely to be around 1070 and 1080 performance, by going off history, and then Volta will come out and destroy it. AMD need to pull a master stroke by releasing an absolute monster of a GPU for a good price
Click to expand...
Let's break this down: currently the GTX 1080 is 35% faster than the Fury X at 1440p (includes both DX11 and DX12). The difference between the two is made even smaller when you only look at DX12/Vulkan benchmarks. This means that there is no way that Vega with its rumoured 1500 mhz clockspeed would be slower than the GTX 1080.
 
Toss3 said:
Let's break this down: currently the GTX 1080 is 35% faster than the Fury X at 1440p (includes both DX11 and DX12). The difference between the two is made even smaller when you only look at DX12/Vulkan benchmarks. This means that there is no way that Vega with its rumoured 1500 mhz clockspeed would be slower than the GTX 1080.
Click to expand...
+1. FuryX @ 1500mhz would smoke a 1080 let alone Vega with further improvements to the core.
 
Gregster said:
I just had a look at the AMD GPU sales section here and it is pretty barren. No 390s, no Nanos, no Fury or Fury X. That is pretty crazy but there is 2x Duo for sale (not that I would advise anyone to go XFire) and your next best GPU is the 580. Still, 8 days til Computex, so hopefully Vega 10 will be a beast to kick some NVidia butt!
Click to expand...

i sold 2 of my fury x's from my spare gaming rig last month (on a selling site) you would be amazed how much people will pay for fury x's.... i still have loads of people (on the site i use) asking me if i will sell my other two.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom